the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Regional seismic risk assessment based on ground conditions in Uzbekistan
Vakhitkhan Alikhanovich Ismailov
Sharofiddin Ismatullayevich Yodgorov
Akhror Sabriddinovich Khusomiddinov
Eldor Makhmadiyorovich Yadigarov
Bekzod Uktamovich Aktamov
Shuhrat Avazov
Abstract. The assessment of losses from strong earthquakes and the reduction of earthquake consequences are of a great importance in maintaining the seismic safety. Special attention is given to evaluating the magnitude of economic losses caused by earthquakes, particularly the assessment of different levels of seismic risk, in order to protect the population and territories located in seismically active areas. To ensure sustainable development of countries, it is essential to estimate the economic losses that will occur in regions due to strong earthquakes and forecast them within the specified return periods at a given probabilities. Measures can then be implemented to mitigate the consequences of earthquakes.
For the basis of seismic risk assessment, maps of seismic intensity increment and an improved map of seismic hazard have been developed, taking into account the engineering-geological conditions of the territory of Uzbekistan and the seismic characteristics of soils.
For seismic risk map development, databases were created based on GIS platforms allowing us to systematize and evaluate the regional distribution of information on seismic hazards, number of buildings and construction types, coefficient of the seismic vulnerability of buildings, cadastral value of buildings, etc.
- Preprint
(2164 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Vakhitkhan Alikhanovich Ismailov et al.
Status: open (until 26 Oct 2023)
-
RC1: 'Comment on nhess-2023-105', Anonymous Referee #1, 19 Sep 2023
reply
The article discusses the outcomes of developing GIS-platforms for seismic risk assessment in Uzbekistan. The significance of this publication is unquestionable. Nevertheless, in the reviewer's view, the authors have not effectively organized the information pertaining to the initial data used for risk assessments, nor have they adequately described the process for determining the final risk values. The text of the article is poorly structured, containing many introductory sentences, while there are no descriptions of specific stages of development of new maps. The article does not reveal the novelty of taking into account the ground conditions indicated in the title. The described changes in ground conditions accounting (135) are not used further and are not described. Furthermore, there are numerous inaccuracies within the article's text, tables and figures provided do not adhere to the standards expected in scientific publications.
As submitted, the article cannot be published. I recommend that the authors resubmit it after significant revision.
Here are some comments, though they not encompass all the deficiencies in the submitted text.
- Table 1 is redundant. The text suggests that it includes events with magnitudes greater than or equal to 7, which does not align with the table's actual content. Additionally, there is no information regarding the type of magnitude used, and inconsistencies exist in the spelling of the same names. The date of the event 1924 is not provided.
- The title of the second section should be changed to “Data and methods”
- 101-102 - missing references;
- 102 – The principle of division of the territory into 12 districts is not described. There is also no description of the division into sub-regions and sections;
- Figure 1 should be modified. Only the demonstration areas and the legend should be shown. All information about the map should be given in the figure caption;
- Figure 2 - see comments on Figure 1;
- Figure 3 is not referenced in the text, and the panels within the figure remain undescribed. The panels essentially replicate maps found in other figures.
- Figure 4 - see comments on Figure 1. Figure 4 may be shown in conjunction with Figure 2. In this case it will be convenient for the reader to compare them
- The color code of intensity in Fig. 2 and Fig. 4 must be the same.
- Сhanges in the definition of intensity should be described in more detail. For example, by presenting a table of area for one and the other seismic hazard maps.
- GESI_Program - missing references
- 215 “Damage characteristics of buildings” - table it;
- 240 - The vulnerability functions used should be cited. If they are presented in Fig. 5, this should be indicated.
The article does not specify (except for Fig. 5) the ratio of peak acceleration and macroseismic intensity used. A correspondence table or conversion formula (with references) is needed
- 252 “GESI_Program and experimental data of Sh. Khakimov” - missing references
- Figure 7 - see comments on Figure 1
- 305, Figure 9 - PGA need to be in m/s2 as on Figure 5. The grading of the PGA in Fig. 8 is not clear. It would seem that it should coincide with the one in Fig. 5 and, accordingly, with the intervals corresponding to the seismic intensity values.; EMS-98 - missing references
- Figure 10 - - see comments on Figure 1, Figure 9;
Figure 11 Since administrative divisions are difficult to present to the general reader, the information in Figure 11 should either be presented in the form of a map or population numbers should be given instead of/along with the names of administrative divisions. see comments on Figure 9
- 335-340 - Technical information is redundant. If the database is open, a link to it should be provided. If it is closed for public access, this should also be indicated;
- Figures 12 and 13 should be redrawn. as well as described in the text;
- 360-390 The section provides a map of seismic risk. It is not clear what the authors meant by "Probable seismic damage" in the title of the paragraph. Since the title of the article contains new seismic hazard estimates, seismic risk estimates based on the previous seismic hazard map should be given for comparison.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2023-105-RC1 -
CC1: 'Reply on RC1', Sharofiddin Yodgorov, 25 Sep 2023
reply
Many thanks to the Referee for reviewing our article in detail and expressing their feedback. We have corrected all your comments. The following is the corrected comments
Vakhitkhan Alikhanovich Ismailov et al.
Vakhitkhan Alikhanovich Ismailov et al.
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 207 | 48 | 14 | 269 | 5 | 5 |
- HTML: 207
- PDF: 48
- XML: 14
- Total: 269
- BibTeX: 5
- EndNote: 5
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1